House of Commons Hansard #11 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was kimberley.

Topics

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Keith Martin Canadian Alliance Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Elk Island for his comments. I would like him to support the bill so we can get it to committee and make the changes that he has suggested.

Indeed, he is correct in saying that if innocent companies are subjected to damage in the process of search and seizure they should be compensated for that damage if they are proven, by definition, to be innocent. I encourage him to support the bill in order to get it to committee so we can have those amendments put forward.

I would also suggest to him that the purpose of the bill is to clean up the diamond industry so that it would benefit from this. Indeed, having a clean diamond industry would enable more people to buy diamonds. Otherwise, if the Canadian public and others in the west know that diamonds are attached to the murder and maiming of innocent men, women, and children they may decide to choose not to buy diamonds at all, in which case it would hurt honest diamond sellers.

It is in the interests of the diamond producers in Canada and the international community to clean this up. The Kimberley Process would do that. There is a vested interest not only from a humanitarian perspective in that vein but also from a purely pragmatic, self-centred, and economic interest.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

John Bryden Liberal Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have a comment to those looking in. The tradition in the British parliamentary system is that the second reading vote is for agreement in principle to legislation, the idea being that the legislation at second reading is probably flawed, that these flaws are to be worked out at the committee stage, and that if a member still feels dissatisfied that the bill does not meet his objections and concerns, then third reading is the time to vote.

I would make the observation that the member for Elk Island is taking a position that would be more appropriate at third reading rather than second reading and that he should support the bill if he agrees with it in principle. If he does not agree with it in principle, then he should certainly vote against it.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Keith Martin Canadian Alliance Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak for my colleague. I will be voting for the bill to get it to committee to make those changes. I encourage the hon. member to do a few other things if he would not mind, along the same vein.

First, is to convince his government to put conditionality on the new African agenda that it has, and that the trafficking of blood diamonds be put in as an activity that would prohibit countries from receiving aid from Canada. That would send a strong message.

The other is to put it in line with other processes similar to what Canada did for landmines and say that we should bring the nations of the world together to adopt the Kimberley Process in the same vein so that this actual treaty does not drag on for years on end. We should get the job done as soon as possible.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Liberal

John Bryden Liberal Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating my colleague, the member for Nepean—Carleton, for his longstanding initiative on this issue that has led to the bill before the House today.

Whether the bill is perfect of not, the credit must go to the member for Nepean--Carleton for keeping the government's attention on the issue. The member made a number of visits to Sierra Leone and saw firsthand the awful conflict, financed by the type of diamond that is basically scrabbled from the earth and then sold on the international markets, both legally and illegally.

Bill C-14 gives me an opportunity that I will take advantage of to tell a story of refugees and something that happened in my riding. It pertains very closely to the issue, although it may take a little time before members appreciate where I am coming from with this story.

In October 2000 in my constituency office I was approached by a gentleman who has a longstanding reputation of bringing refugees into Canada. He operated through an organization called Operation Lifeline. This person wanted me to intercede on behalf of two young men from Angola who had apparently been denied their refugee status. This is a common occurrence in an MP's constituency office. We try to cut through the red tape or try to intercede in compassionate circumstances because all MPs have this direct line to the immigration and refugee authorities to help out in situations like this.

I take this business of writing directly to the minister and asking for her intervention very seriously. I always do due diligence. I sought and obtained the file of the refugee hearing on these two young men before I actually interviewed them.

There was no question in my mind that the Immigration and Refugee Board was absolutely proper in its decision to reject the application of these two young men who had come in and sought refugee status at Niagara Falls. The description that they gave at the board hearing was full of contradictions. Basically their story was that they were two young men whose father worked as a chauffeur for the government in Angola. According to them, their father had fallen out of favour and had disappeared and been mysteriously shot. Suddenly, a few days afterwards, some unknown person, a benefactor, arranged for the two young men to be smuggled out of Angola and flown to Zimbabwe, from there to Rome, from Rome to Switzerland, from Switzerland to New York, from New York to Buffalo. This is quite a trip.

As the refugee board members queried them, it turned out that the young men could provide no detail. In fact, most of their information was very contradictory. Apparently, they said that when their father disappeared their mother contacted government officials. Of course that did not make sense if the government was supposed to be responsible for killing the father, and so the story went on. I had serious reservations about these two young men right at the outset.

Subsequently, just at about the time the election was called, these two young men came in with their sponsor. Their sponsor explained that they had been in the country for some nine months and they were in a local high school in grade 11 where they had, somewhat miraculously in my mind, acquired fluency in English. Angola of course is Portuguese speaking. These two young men were suddenly so fluent in English that they could obtain very high marks in grade 11, which is certainly very impressive.

He explained that various schools and organizations were very much in support of my interceding on behalf of these two young men with the minister, and so I talked with them. I had the same experience as the refugee board. They spoke but there were all kinds of inconsistencies in their story. One of the biggest inconsistencies was they could not tell me who financed their trip from Angola to Zimbabwe to Rome to Switzerland to New York and to Buffalo. They had no idea. They could not name the people who were their benefactors.

There are two problems of which we have to be aware. One is the fact that it costs a lot of money to go on the kind of particular trip we are talking about. These two young men were supposed to be the sons of a lowly chauffeur for the government of Angola. Second, is the fact that Angola is notorious for the exportation of conflict diamonds. Sierra Leone and Angola share two things in common: they are failed states with perpetual civil wars and those ugly civil wars are fueled by conflict diamonds. What is basically happening is the illicit scrabbling of diamonds out of the soil and those diamonds are usually smuggled around the world where they wind up in the hands of legitimate companies.

As has been referred to here several times, Zimbabwe of all countries is another state that very obviously is actively engaged in black market and contraband trades. These two young men went first to Zimbabwe then to Rome and then to Switzerland, the centre of the world trade in diamonds, and then on to New York and Buffalo. In my view, it was reasonable to suspect that these two young men were likely either couriers for conflict diamonds or their passage had been financed by conflict diamonds. I could hardly ask the minister to give them a minister's certificate allowing them to stay in the country and bypass the decision of the refugee board.

Where the story gets really awkward is the fact that this occurred at the beginning of the last election. One cannot imagine what happened. First, the people sponsoring these two boys made it very clear to me. They said that if I wrote to the minister and asked that these boys be allowed to stay, the minister would grant that request. Second, they indicated they would work against me in an election campaign if I did not write the minister.

What subsequently happened, and I have it here and I am sorry I cannot display it, but these individuals were good to their word. I was flooded with about 300 letters and e-mails as they went to every church and school in my riding. They went everywhere. When I campaigned door to door, people asked me what I was doing about these two young men. They asked me why I would not agree to let them stay in the country.

I want Canadians to know that MPs can resist that kind of pressure. I do not know how many votes I lost in the last election, but in the end those two young men were deported. I do not know what happened to them subsequently. All I know is that there was a genuine, reasonable doubt of the bona fides of these two young men. It would have been totally irresponsible for me, to merely guarantee my re-election, to have written the minister and ask that they stay in the country.

What does this all have to do with conflict diamonds? It has to do with the fact that these diamonds are not only used to finance conflicts abroad. They are also used to finance the movement of all kinds of illicit peoples around the world. This is the kind of payment that people smugglers take. This is the kind of payment that terrorists receive.

The member for Nepean--Carleton is very right to have zeroed in on this problem, not just because of the conflicts in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Angola, but also because conflict diamonds are financing terrorism around the world. They are financing people smuggling. It has to be stopped.

Bill C-14 is a very good bill because it basically requires legitimate diamond traders to issue or receive diamonds by means of a certificate of authenticity or source which says that the diamonds have been bought and purchased through legitimate channels and are not ultimately diamonds that have been obtained in countries like Angola or Sierra Leone illicitly.

I will not go through the bill in detail but I would like to draw attention to one small aspect of the bill just in case the people watching have not noticed it. That is subclause 9(2)(c) which says in effect that any diamonds which are possibly conflict diamonds and which are in the country now are exempt from this bill provided that the person who possesses them at the time this bill comes into force can show documentation on how they obtained them. In other words, if a legitimate diamond trader has diamonds that he or she knows are probably originally conflict diamonds which have been brought into the country illegally, he or she can declare this and be exempt from the impact of the bill. In other words, he or she will be able to keep the diamonds and trade them.

Here is the kicker. If, on the other hand, any trader in the country has received smuggled conflict diamonds, then he or she will not be able to present the evidence that these diamonds are indeed legitimately acquired. In other words, the beautiful trap that this bill sets is that all conflict diamonds that are in the country by way of smuggling will be trapped in the country and the only way they can be used is by smuggling them out of the country into another country. Of course I do not need to tell members that smuggling has a whole other series of penalties under the laws of Canada, with all kinds of delightful fines and terms of imprisonment. Of course this is what we want because in the end what this whole question of conflict diamonds really amounts to is the financing of death. It has to stop.

This bill takes a huge step forward. It is going forward in concert with many countries around the world. I regret to say that Canada is not actually leading this; it is among many others. However one thing that no one can take away from anyone in this place is the fact that the member for Nepean—Carleton initiated this move in the House with his private member's bill, which has now become a very fine piece of government legislation.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

David Pratt Liberal Nepean—Carleton, ON

Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker seems to be a very avid supporter of this legislation. I congratulate him in that respect. His comments were eloquent to the point of the importance of this legislation.

Being an ardent supporter of this legislation, I would like to ask the hon. member a question in relation to the issues raised by the member for Elk Island concerning sections 23 and 24 of the bill which deal with the enforcement powers, investigation and the designation document. Section 24 says that when exercising their enforcement powers investigators may enter on and pass through or over private property, et cetera.

Would he attempt to communicate to the hon. member for Elk Island that these provisions are consistent with the provisions that are in the Criminal Code and that this legislation derives its authority from the Criminal Code? Therefore everything that is in this legislation is entirely consistent with what appears in the Criminal Code.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

John Bryden Liberal Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, ON

Mr. Speaker, I would just say that human rights always has to take priority over property rights. I appreciate where the member for Elk Island is coming from because his party, and I do not mean this in any way in a disparaging sense, has always been a spokesman for protecting property rights.

If the member for Elk Island were to give this bill a chance, particularly after it goes to the committee stage, I think he would find that, in the interests of solving the problem of trafficking in these diamonds for unlawful purposes, the bill is a reasonable curtailment of civil liberties in terms of the need to search and seize property if there is a reasonable expectation that this property may be held for purposes that are contrary to human rights that may injure people either here or elsewhere.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Garry Breitkreuz Canadian Alliance Yorkton—Melville, SK

Mr. Speaker, I am flabbergasted at what I just heard. I know that my colleague from Elk Island would raise the same point.

I just heard the member say that human rights would override property rights. I cannot believe that kind of statement coming from the member. Surely he would realize that property rights are one of the most fundamental of all human rights. How could he have erred in this respect?

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

John Bryden Liberal Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, ON

Mr. Speaker, here we see the gap between the Liberals and the opposition member who just spoke and his party.

I do not take back my remarks whatsoever. Human rights exceed property rights. The human condition is what we as Canadians must always address first and foremost. Obviously when we have to make a choice between human rights and property rights, property rights must come second. What would happen if somebody had a ton of heroin on their premises? Are we to say that we could not go in and seize that heroin?

Conflict diamonds, like hard drugs, do the same kind of damage to human beings. We as citizens of this country, as Canadians, have to put the safety and security of human beings before the rights of private property.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ken Epp Canadian Alliance Elk Island, AB

Mr. Speaker, I think the member has it confused. It is not a case of either/or. We are talking about the right of human beings to own and enjoy their property, a concept which the Liberals do not understand. That is why at the end of this week farmers on the prairies will be going to jail for selling their own grain. They do not understand this.

I am talking about those people who are abused when in fact they are innocent. There has to be a clause in the bill which says that if there is an investigation and if doors are broken down and safes are destroyed with explosives, there will be compensation for the loss when the people are found not guilty. That is what we are talking about.

I would like the hon. member to respond positively to that, not make those lame Liberal excuses.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

John Bryden Liberal Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, ON

Mr. Speaker, I do not have any problem with that whatsoever. That is not what was said by the previous speaker from the Canadian Alliance however, who would have us believe that property rights take precedence over human rights.

Of course someone whose premises have been entered in a forcible manner should have some right of recourse. I would suggest to the member for Elk Island that he should support the bill so that type of amendment can be put forward in committee. It is a reasonable thought. It has to be put in the context of similar situations as described in the Criminal Code.

I know the member for Elk Island is himself a very compassionate human being. He is simply saying in his intervention that we should always have a regard, not for property rights, but we should always have regard for individuals to whom the government may inadvertently do injury. Of course those individuals have to be protected.

I see that the member for Elk Island would agree however that if the authorities have reason to believe that narcotics or conflict diamonds are held on the premises, they should be able to enter those premises and establish whether or not such articles are there.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jacques Saada Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I would like to obtain the consent of this House to adopt the following motion. I move:

That the first report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs dealing with the list of members and associate members of the standing committees be deemed tabled and adopted.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Does the deputy government whip have the unanimous consent of the House to propose the motion?

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yes.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jacques Saada Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like it to be recorded that the opposition to the tabling of this motion, which would enable the standing committees of this House to function, comes from the Canadian Alliance.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Order. That is not a point of order.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ken Epp Canadian Alliance Elk Island, AB

Mine is a true point of order, Mr. Speaker. The procedure and House affairs committee will be dealing with the motion to provide for the election of chairs and vice-chairs of committees this very week. Therefore, I believe it is premature to begin committees when the method for electing chairs is under debate.

However I noticed that currently on the order paper there is Motion No. 230 from the opposition House leader which amends the standing orders to provide for secret ballot elections at committees. Secret ballots make sense for the Speaker and make sense for our committee chairmen. Therefore I ask for unanimous consent to adopt Motion No. 230.

If the House adopts Motion No. 230 today, then the official opposition will certainly have no hesitation in agreeing with the member's proposition to concur in the report on committee membership.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Does the House give its consent for the hon. member for Elk Island to propose his motion?

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

On a different point of order, the hon. member for Elk Island.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ken Epp Canadian Alliance Elk Island, AB

Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite said, I would point out that it was the Liberals who were opposed to this.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Just so the Chair can be consistent, while it was not a point of order from one side of the House, it is neither a point of order for the other side of the House.

I want to make it clear that the Chair will not possibly be as generous on another point of order if it is not a different point of order. The hon. deputy whip.

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

Liberal

Jacques Saada Liberal Brossard—La Prairie, QC

Mr. Speaker, I defer to your judgment. It would seem to me that what I proposed as a motion has nothing to do with the way the chairs are elected, but rather with the composition of the committees—

Export and Import of Rough Diamonds ActGovernment Orders

1:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but this is heading toward the same debate as was raised by the hon. member for Elk Island. This point of view has been submitted to the House and did not obtain consent. The matter is closed and will be brought up again at another time within another context.

Resuming debate on Bill C-14. The hon. member for Lévis-et-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière.